Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSlyMoogle
Uhm 6 is really the only game that doesn't fit the pattern. 1,3 and 5 do have terrible stories. 5 is the worst offender in my opinion considering the time of its creation. It's pretty obvious in that game the just focused basically on the battle system. Honestly the guy probably wrote the game script in like a night while drinking copious amounts of Saki.
2 and 4 are basically just a story. You can honestly go through both just mashing buttons if you fight enough random battles.
6 is the only one with something different to offer, however... 90% of the bosses and enemies in the game can be defeated with the vanish/doom technique and there's another technique that can be used on those who can't. So I think 6 can go either way. Yeah you can make it complex, or you can just go with it.
|
Okay, so rather than "Uhm, no you're dumb"ing each other why don't we actually refer to points and actually debate on something tangible than "No, I'm right because!"?
Regarding the stories, its subjective in the end. V, maybe, sure. Its not that great, but it has its moments. You disagree, so okay. I don't agree with III. Like I said before, its just different. I think the individual "episodes" within the towns and whatnot are much more memorable than the entire story of II. I can see how someone might prefer II's story, though. Again, subjective. They're just different. I is just primitive. It might not be good, but you can't say they didn't try; they didn't focus on the story.
Gameplay, however, I think you're wrong. II, yes, may be broken. It might ultimately boil down to "A, B, A, B, A" for an hour and instant win. But the system itself was brand new and it was pretty risky for a company who just on the verge of closure and only saved by a single game to completely alter the gameplay to the sequel to that game. It might be broken and easily exploitable, but there was definitely a lot of focus put on creating that system.
You're argument against IV's gameplay is silly, IMO. Pretty much any FF game can be beaten by levelling up enough or exploiting whatever system is in place. Now, granted, I did say that IV fits the bill the most. The player has no input on character development or abilities beyond levelling up. However, the additional abilities and switching up the party with completely different characters adds a lot to the gameplay. Its out of the player's control, sure, but it works. I'd say it works better than III's Job System.
And VI... really? I've never heard of the Vanish/Doom technique. Maybe its there and maybe it cheapens the gameplay. Same thing with II, though: just because its broken doesn't mean it wasn't focused upon. VI pretty much decided the path series took from then on. Pretty much everything it introduced got carried on in future games. You may not like it, there may be two spells that can be easily exploited, but the gameplay was definitely not glossed over in favor of the story.